Notices. Decision and Order

26,760 words·~122 min read·/register/2007/04/09/07-1773·

A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.

BILLING CODE 3710-GN-M DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Notice of Proposed Information Collection Requests AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, invites comments on the proposed information collection requests as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before June 8, 2007. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)provide interested Federal agencies and the public an early opportunity to comment on information collection requests. OMB may amend or waive the requirement for public consultation to the extent that public participation in the approval process would defeat the purpose of the information collection, violate State or Federal law, or substantially interfere with any agency's ability to perform its statutory obligations. The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management, publishes that notice containing proposed information collection requests prior to submission of these requests to OMB. Each proposed information collection, grouped by office, contains the following:

(1)Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;

(2)Title;

(3)Summary of the collection;

(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;

(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and

(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. The Department of Education is especially interested in public comment addressing the following issues:

(1)Is this collection necessary to the proper functions of the Department;

(2)will this information be processed and used in a timely manner;

(3)is the estimate of burden accurate;

(4)how might the Department enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and

(5)how might the Department minimize the burden of this collection on the respondents, including through the use of information technology. Dated: April 3, 2007. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official Regulatory Information Management Services Office of Management. Institute of Education Sciences *Type of Review:* New. *Title:* An Investigation of the Impact of a Traits-Based Writing Model on Student Achievement. *Frequency:* Semi-Annually; three times per year. *Affected Public:* State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs; Individuals or household. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 3,392. *Burden Hours:* 7,072. *Abstract:* This study is designed to test the effectiveness of an analytical trait-based model for teaching and assessing student writing, called 6+1 Trait(r) Writing, by examining its impact on the writing achievement of 5th graders. The model is designed to improve student writing through an integrated approach to teaching and assessing writing skills, and it incorporates ten instructional strategies to develop the specific traits of writing. Requests for copies of the proposed information collection request may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov* , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3299. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments” to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* . Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E7-6617 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request AGENCY: Department of Education. SUMMARY: The IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management invites comments on the submission for OMB review as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995. DATES: Interested persons are invited to submit comments on or before May 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Education Desk Officer, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW., Room 10222, Washington, DC 20503. Commenters are encouraged to submit responses electronically by e-mail to *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* or via fax to

(202)395-6974. Commenters should include the following subject line in their response “Comment: [insert OMB number], [insert abbreviated collection name, e.g., “Upward Bound Evaluation”]. Persons submitting comments electronically should not submit paper copies. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 3506 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) requires that the Office of Management and Budget

(1)Type of review requested, e.g. new, revision, extension, existing or reinstatement;

(2)Title;

(3)Summary of the collection;

(4)Description of the need for, and proposed use of, the information;

(5)Respondents and frequency of collection; and

(6)Reporting and/or Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites public comment. Dated: April 3, 2007. Angela C. Arrington, IC Clearance Official, Regulatory Information Management Services, Office of Management. Office of the Chief Information Officer *Type of Review:* Extension. *Title:* Education Resource Organizations Directory (EROD). *Frequency:* On Occasion; Annually. *Affected Public:* State, Local, or Tribal Gov't, SEAs or LEAs; Businesses or other for-profit; Not-for-profit institutions. *Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour Burden:* *Responses:* 3,088. *Burden Hours:* 677. *Abstract:* The Education Resource Organizations Directory

(EROD)is an electronic directory of educational resource organizations and services available at the State, regional, and national level. The goal of this directory is to help individuals and organizations identify and contact organizational sources of information and assistance on a broad range of education-related topics. Users of the directory include diverse groups such as teachers, librarians, students, researchers, and parents. Requests for copies of the information collection submission for OMB review may be accessed from *http://edicsweb.ed.gov* , by selecting the “Browse Pending Collections” link and by clicking on link number 3274. When you access the information collection, click on “Download Attachments “ to view. Written requests for information should be addressed to U.S. Department of Education, 400 Maryland Avenue, SW., Potomac Center, 9th Floor, Washington, DC 20202-4700. Requests may also be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* or faxed to 202-245-6623. Please specify the complete title of the information collection when making your request. Comments regarding burden and/or the collection activity requirements should be electronically mailed to *ICDocketMgr@ed.gov* . Individuals who use a telecommunications device for the deaf

(TDD)may call the Federal Information Relay Service

(FIRS)at 1-800-877-8339. [FR Doc. E7-6618 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4000-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [Docket No. EERE-2006-WAV-0147] Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver From the Department of Energy

(DOE)Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures to Mitsubishi Electric, and Modification of a 2004 Waiver Granted to Mitsubishi Electric From the Same DOE Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-012) AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Decision and Order. SUMMARY: Today's notice publishes a Decision and Order (Case No. CAC-012) granting a Waiver to Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (“MEUS”) from the existing Department of Energy

(DOE)residential and commercial package air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for specified R410A CITY MULTI products. MEUS shall be required to test and rate the R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products according to the alternate test procedure set forth in this notice. DOE is also amending the waiver granted to MEUS for its R22 CITY MULTI products in August 2004 to explicitly prohibit MEUS from making energy efficiency representations regarding these products unless such representations are consistent with the alternate test procedure. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:

(202)586-9611, E-mail: *Michael.Raymond@ee.doe.gov;* or Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103,

(202)586-9507; E-mail: *Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations Parts 430.27(l) and 431.401(f)(4), notice is hereby given of the issuance of a Decision and Order granting MEUS a Waiver from the applicable Department of Energy residential and commercial package air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for its R410A CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning (“VRFZ”) products, subject to a condition requiring MEUS to test and rate its R410A CITY MULTI products pursuant to the alternate test procedure described in this notice. Today's decision requires that any representations concerning the energy efficiency of these products are made consistent with the provisions and restrictions in the alternate test procedure. The waiver granted for MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products on August 27, 2004, is hereby amended to prohibit MEUS from making energy efficiency representations regarding its R22 CITY MULTI products unless such representations are made consistent with the provisions set forth in the alternate test procedure described in this notice. Issued in Washington, DC, on April 2, 2007. Alexander A. Karsner, Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. Decision and Order *In the Matter of:* Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (“MEUS”) (Case No. CAC-012). Background Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (“EPCA”) sets forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part B of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) provides for the “Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products other than Automobiles.” Part C of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317) provides for an energy efficiency program entitled “Certain Industrial Equipment,” which is similar to the program in Part B, and which includes commercial air conditioning equipment, packaged boilers, water heaters, and other types of commercial equipment. Today's notice involves residential products under Part B, and commercial equipment under Part C. Both parts specifically provide for definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. With respect to test procedures, both parts generally authorize the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use and estimated operating costs, and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6293(b)(3), 6314(a)(2)) The test procedure for residential central air conditioning and heat pump products is contained in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix M. For commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA provides that the test procedures shall be those generally accepted industry testing or rating procedures developed or recognized by the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (“ARI”) or by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (“ASHRAE”), as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in effect on June 30, 1992. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) This section also provides for the Secretary of Energy to amend the test procedure for a product if the industry test procedure is amended, unless the Secretary determines that such a modified test procedure does not meet the statutory criteria. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)) On December 8, 2006, DOE published a final rule adopting test procedures for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, effective January 8, 2007. 71 FR 71340. DOE adopted ARI Standard 210/240-2003 for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with capacities <65,000 Btu/h and ARI Standard 340/360-2004 for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment with capacities ≥65,000 Btu/h and <240,000 Btu/h. *Id* . at 71371. The[MR1] capacities of MEUS's CITY MULTI VRFZ products fall in the ranges covered by ARI Standard 340/360-2004 and the DOE test procedure for residential products referred to above. DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered consumer products. These provisions are set forth in 10 CFR 430.27. The waiver provisions for commercial equipment are substantively identical to those for covered consumer products and are found at 10 CFR 431.401. The waiver provisions allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (“Assistant Secretary”) to temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(1), 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). The Assistant Secretary may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27 (l), 10 CFR 431.401 (f)(4). Petitioners are to include in their petition any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. 10 CFR 430.27(b)(1)(iii), 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure amendments resolving the problem that is the subject of the waiver become effective. The waiver process also allows the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned DOE for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. 10 CFR 430.27(a)(2), 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if necessary. 10 CFR 430.27(h), 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4). On November 7, 2005, MEUS filed an Application for Interim Waiver and Petition for Waiver from the test procedures applicable to the R410A models of its CITY MULTI VRFZ line of residential and commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment. MEUS's petition requested a waiver from both the residential and commercial test procedures. In particular, MEUS requested a waiver from the residential test procedures contained in 10 CFR Part 430, subpart B, Appendix M, and a waiver from the commercial test procedures contained in ARI Standard 210/240-2003 and in ARI Standard 340/360-2000. 1 MEUS seeks a waiver from the applicable test procedures because the design characteristics of the R410A systems prevent testing according to the currently prescribed test procedures. 1 In its petition, MEUS also requested a waiver from ARI Standard 210/240-2003. Based on a review of the products listed by MEUS in its petition, DOE has determined that none of the products have the combined features (i.e., 3-phase power and rated capacity less than 65,000 Btu/h) that would require a waiver from ARI Standard 210/240-2003. On March 24, 2006, DOE published MEUS's Petition for Waiver and granted the Application for Interim Waiver. 2 DOE also published for comment an alternate test procedure for MEUS. DOE stated that if it specified an alternate test procedure for MEUS in the subsequent Decision and Order, DOE would consider applying the procedure to similar waivers for residential and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps, including such waivers that previously have been granted. 3 DOE solicited comments, data, and information respecting the petition and the proposed alternate test procedure. 2 *Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-012)* , 71 FR 14858 (March 24, 2006) (hereinafter, March 24th Notice). On April 11, 2006, MEUS submitted a Corrected Petition for Waiver of Test Procedure and Application for Interim Waiver (“Corrected Petition”) to DOE. The Corrected Petition noted five minor errors in the list of model numbers for which the waiver and the interim waiver had been requested. MEUS requested that the interim waiver granted apply to the corrected list of model numbers, and that DOE use the corrected list of model numbers in any future actions regarding the Petition for Test Procedure Waiver. In a letter dated June 1, 2006, DOE granted MEUS's request. 3 March 24th Notice, 71 FR 14861. DOE received written comments from seven companies—Rheem Heating and Cooling, Lennox International Inc., Daikin AC (Americas), Inc, Samsung and Quietside, Sanyo Fisher Company, United Mechanical and MEUS—in response to the March 24th Notice. Only one commenter expressed opposition to the MEUS petition. 4 Additionally, most of the commenters responded favorably to DOE's proposed alternate test procedure. 5 Commenters generally agreed that an alternate test procedure is necessary while a final test procedure for these types of products is being developed. 6 4 The only commenter that objected to MEUS's Petition was Lennox International Inc. 5 See Comments submitted by Sanyo Fisher Company, Samsung and Quietside, United Mechanical, Daikin AC (Americas), Inc., and Rheem Heating and Cooling. 6 See Comments submitted by MEUS, Sanyo Fisher Company, Samsung and Quietside, Daikin AC (Americas), Inc., and Rheem Heating and Cooling. Assertions and Determinations MEUS's Petition for Waiver DOE previously granted MEUS a waiver from test procedures in 2004 for similar CITY MULTI VRFZ models which use R22 as a refrigerant. 7 Given product adjustments to accommodate the new R410A refrigerant, MEUS requested a waiver from the test procedures for its new CITY MULTI models. The MEUS petition requested that DOE grant a waiver from existing test procedures until such time as a representative test procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. MEUS did not include an alternate test procedure in its petition and noted that it knows of no test procedure that could evaluate its products in a representative manner. However, MEUS is actively working with ARI to develop test procedures that accurately reflect the operation and energy consumption of these types of units. 7 *Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver From the DOE Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure to Mitsubishi Electric (Case No. CAC-008)* , 69 FR 52660, at 52662 (Aug. 27, 2004) (hereinafter, “2004 Waiver”). MEUS's petition presented several arguments in support of its claim. MEUS stated that the design characteristics of the R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ systems prevent testing according to the currently prescribed test procedures for the same reasons that its R22 models were previously granted a waiver. The R410A CITY MULTI systems, like the R22 models, can connect more indoor units than the test laboratories can physically test at one time. Because of the inability to test products with so many indoor units, testing laboratories will not be able to test many of the R410A system combinations. Furthermore, MEUS asserted that the current DOE test procedures do not provide direction for determining what combinations of outdoor and indoor units should be tested in the circumstance where a multitude of different combinations are possible. Also, the test procedures provide no mechanism for sampling component combinations. In addition, MEUS asserted that it is not practical to test all of the potentially available combinations of indoor and outdoor units, which could number in the billions. MEUS stated that the R410A CITY MULTI system is designed to be flexible, with numerous combinations possible. According to MEUS, each of the 108,000 Btu/h rated outdoor units is designed to be connected with up to 18 indoor units, while each of the 234,000 Btu/h rated outdoor units can be configured with up to 32 indoor units. MEUS offers 58 different indoor models that can be used in the different combinations. Given the above, MEUS asserts the current test procedures cannot practically be applied to the CITY MULTI VRFZ systems. MEUS claims that many of the benefits of its systems' characteristics, including variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, part-load operation and simultaneous heating and cooling, are not credited under the current test procedures. For residential systems, there are some deficiencies in the current DOE test methods and calculation algorithms when applied to multi-split systems. With regard to commercial systems, MEUS asserts that the current test procedure for the energy efficiency ratio (“EER”) does not capture the energy savings of VRFZ products. The same issue was raised by MEUS in its petition for waiver for its R22 CITY MULTI products. As DOE stated in the waiver granted in August 2004, “while this assertion is true, it is irrelevant because the full load EER energy efficiency descriptor is one mandated by EPCA for these products (42 U.S.C. 6313(a)(1)(c)), and the relevant energy performance is the peak load efficiency, not the seasonal energy savings.” 8 A waiver can only be granted if a test procedure does not fairly represent the peak load energy consumption characteristics which EER measures. Therefore, the basis for this waiver, as was the case for the 2004 Waiver, is the problem of being physically unable to test most of the complete systems in a laboratory, the regulatory requirement to test the highest-sales-volume combination, and the lack of a method for predicting the performance of untested combinations. 8 69 FR 52662 (Aug. 27, 2004). Lennox International Inc. argued that waivers for VRFZ systems should not be granted because the existing DOE test procedures are available to rate these systems. DOE agrees that the existing test procedures can be used, but only after clarifications are made and deficiencies are addressed. In August 2004, DOE granted a Petition for Waiver to MEUS relating to its R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products, finding that “the basic model contains one or more design characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures.” 9 MEUS's November 2005 Petition for Waiver for its R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products presents virtually the same issues, and thus we find that waiver of the test procedures is appropriate. To enable MEUS to make energy efficiency representations for the specified CITY MULTI products, DOE adopts the alternate test procedure described below. 9 *Ibid* . DOE's Alternate Test Procedure As explained in DOE's March 24th Notice, manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption costs of products covered by EPCA. (42 U.S.C. 6293(c), 42 U.S.C. 6314(d)). The ability of a manufacturer to make representations about the energy efficiency of its products is important, for instance, to determine compliance with state and local energy codes and regulatory requirements. Energy efficiency representations also provide valuable consumer purchasing information. Therefore, to provide a basis from which manufacturers covered by a test procedure waiver for VRFZ products can make valid energy efficiency representations, DOE proposed an alternate test procedure for MEUS in the March 24th Notice. The alternate test procedure has two basic components. First, it permits MEUS to designate a “tested combination” for each model of outdoor unit. The indoor units designated as part of the tested combination must meet specific requirements. For example, the tested combination must have from two to five indoor units so that it can be tested in available test facilities. The tested combination must be tested according to the applicable DOE test procedure. Second, it permits MEUS to represent the energy efficiency for a non-tested combination in two ways. MEUS may represent the energy efficiency of a non-tested combination:

(1)At an energy efficiency level determined under a DOE-approved alternative rating method; or, if method

(1)Is not available,

(2)at the efficiency level of the tested combination utilizing the same outdoor unit. Until an alternative rating method is developed, all combinations with a particular outdoor unit may use the rating of the combination tested with that outdoor unit. DOE believes that allowing MEUS to make energy efficiency representations for non-tested combinations as described above is reasonable because the outdoor unit is the principal efficiency driver. The current test procedure tends to rate these products conservatively. This is because the current test procedure does not account for the product's simultaneous heating and cooling capability, which is more efficient than requiring all zones to be either heated or cooled. Further, the multi-zoning feature of these products, which enables them to cool only those portions of the building that require cooling, can use less energy than if the unit is operated to cool the entire home or a comparatively larger area of a commercial building in response to a single thermostat. Additionally, the current test procedure for commercial equipment requires full load testing, which disadvantages these products because they are optimized for best efficiency when operating with less than full loads. In fact, these products normally operate at part-load conditions. Therefore, as explained in the March 24th Notice, the alternate test procedure will provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy efficiency for such products. 10 10 71 FR 14862 (March 24, 2006). The alternate test procedure applies to both residential and commercial multi-split products. However, some provisions are specific to residential or commercial products. Section

(A)of the alternate test procedure has different provisions for residential and commercial products. Section (B), which defines the combinations of indoor and outdoor units to test, and section (C), which sets forth the requirements for making representations, are the same for both residential and commercial products. Section

(A)distinguishes between residential and commercial products for two reasons. First, 10 CFR part 430.24, used for residential products, already has requirements for selecting split-system combinations based on the highest sales volume. Part 431 of 10 CFR, which applies to commercial products, has no comparable requirements. Section

(A)modifies the residential and commercial CFR requirements so that both residential and commercial products can use the same definition of a “tested combination,” which definition is set forth in section (B). Second, section

(A)requires several test procedure revisions to determine the SEER and HSPF for the tested combination of residential products. No test procedure revisions are introduced for commercial products. [P3] The changes for residential products relate to:

(1)The requirement that all indoor units operate during all tests,

(2)the restriction on using only one indoor test room,

(3)the selection of the modulation levels (maximum, minimum, and a specified intermediate speed) used when testing, and

(4)the algorithm for estimating performance over the intermediate speed operating range. These changes are proposed in a July 20, 2006, DOE notice of proposed rulemaking. 71 FR 41320. For today's Decision and Order, the July 20, 2006, proposed changes to test procedure sections 2.1, 2.2.3, 2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6), 3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2, and 4.2.4.2 constitute mandatory elements of the alternate test procedure. These changes allow indoor units to cycle off, allow the manufacturer to specify the compressor speed used during certain tests, and introduce a new algorithm for estimating power consumption. With regard to the laboratory testing of both residential and commercial products, some of the difficulties are avoided by the requirements for choosing the indoor units to be used in the manufacturer-specified tested combination. For example, in addition to limiting the number of indoor units, another requirement is that all of the indoor units must be subject to meeting the same minimum external static pressure. This requirement allows the test lab to manifold the outlets from each indoor unit into a common plenum that supplies air to a single airflow measuring apparatus. This requirement eliminates situations in which some of the indoor units are ducted and some are non-ducted. Without this requirement, the laboratory must evaluate the capacity of a subgroup of indoor coils separately, and then sum the separate capacities to obtain the overall system capacity. This would require that the test lab must be equipped with multiple airflow measuring apparatuses (which is unlikely), or that the test lab connect its one airflow measuring apparatus to one or more common indoor units until the contribution of each indoor unit has been measured. DOE stated that if it specified an alternate test procedure for MEUS, it would consider applying the procedure to waivers for similar residential and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps produced by other manufacturers. Most of the comments received by DOE favored the proposed alternate test procedure. Commenters generally agreed that an alternate test procedure is appropriate for an interim period while a final test procedure for these products is being developed. 11 11 *See* Comments submitted by Sanyo Fisher Company (Sanyo, No. 7), Samsung and Quietside (Samsung, No. 8), Daikin AC (Americas), Inc. (Daikin, No. 3), and Rheem Heating and Cooling (Rheem, No. 5). Sanyo and Daikin raised concerns regarding DOE's proposal to allow manufacturers to represent the energy efficiency of non-tested combinations at the DOE-prescribed minimum efficiency level for the product class. They suggested that allowing such ratings without testing the product may allow low efficiency products to be installed even though equipment that meets or exceeds the minimum requirements is available. 12 DOE believes these commenters misread the proposed alternate test procedure. As explained in the March 24th Notice, the alternate test procedure adopts a conservative approach for rating VRFZ products based on the tested results of a simple system configuration. In the proposed alternate test procedure, DOE would allow manufacturers to make efficiency representations for non-tested combinations at the DOE-prescribed minimum efficiency level for the product class only if the tested combination with the same outdoor unit met or exceeded the minimum efficiency level. 71 FR 14862, March 24, 2006. DOE is eliminating this option because, as explained below, there is no need for it. 12 *See* Comments submitted by Sanyo Fisher Company, (Sanyo, No.7 at page 1) and Daikin AC (Americas), Inc., (Daikin, No. 3 at pages 1-2). Rheem suggested that third party testing, or on-site witness testing, is the preferred method to verify system performance. 13 Additionally, Rheem requested that, in order to provide fair and equitable test methods and ratings to the consumer, the heating test points and laboratory operating conditions remain consistent. 14 DOE's alternate test procedure would specify certain parameters for the testing of VRFZ products, but would otherwise retain the existing test procedure protocols on issues such as where products are tested, test points, and laboratory operating conditions. Thus, in these respects, VRFZ systems would be tested as other products are tested under the existing test procedures. 13 *See* Comments submitted by Rheem Heating and Cooling, (Rheem, No. 5 at page 2). 14 *See* Comments submitted by Rheem Heating and Cooling, (Rheem, No. 5 at page 2). Lennox suggested that DOE bar sales of non-tested combinations with an evaporator capacity of less than 95% of the nominal outdoor unit capacity unless an approved ARM (alternative rating method) simulation is available to demonstrate conformance to the minimum efficiency requirement. 15 No data was provided to justify this proposed indoor-to-outdoor sizing limitation and so DOE is inclined not to impose such a regulatory limitation on VRFZ configurations at this time. Moreover, DOE expects the development of an alternative rating method that is applicable to multi-split systems like the MEUS CITY MULTI products will follow, and not precede, the work by ARI members to develop a multi-split test procedure. 15 *See* Comments submitted by Lennox International Inc., (Lennox, No. 6 at page 2). Based on the discussion above, DOE believes that the testing problems described above do prevent testing of the R410A CITY MULTI basic model according to the test procedures prescribed in 10 CFR Part 430, Subpart B, Appendix M, and[P9] ARI Standard 340/360-2000. After reviewing and considering all of the comments submitted regarding the proposed alternate test procedure, DOE believes that the proposed alternate test procedure, with the clarifications discussed above, should be adopted. DOE will also consider applying the same alternate test procedure to similar waivers for residential and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps. MEUS Waiver for R22 Products In the previous paragraph, DOE stated its intention to consider applying the alternate test procedure to similar waivers. Such a similar waiver was granted to MEUS for its R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products on August 27, 2004 (the “2004 Waiver”, see footnote 7). As discussed previously, the R22 products are quite similar to the R410A products that are the subject of this waiver. Therefore, today's notice amends the 2004 Waiver to prohibit MEUS from making energy efficiency representations regarding its R22 CITY MULTI products unless such representations are made consistent with the provisions of the alternate test procedure. DOE consulted with the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) concerning the MEUS petition. The FTC did not have any objections to the issuance of the waiver to MEUS. Thus, DOE is granting MEUS's petition. Conclusion After careful consideration of all the material that was submitted by MEUS, the comments received, the review by NIST, and consultation with the FTC, it is ordered that:

(1)The “Petition for Waiver” filed by Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc.

(MEUS)(Case No. CAC-012) is hereby granted as set forth in the paragraphs below.

(2)MEUS shall not be required to test or rate its R410A CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning (“VRFZ”) products listed below on the basis of the currently applicable test procedures, but shall be required to test and rate such products according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in Paragraph (3): 16 16 The * denotes engineering differences in the models. *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System R-2 Series Outdoor Equipment:* • PURY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P108TGMU-*, 108,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P126TGMU-*, 126,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P144TGMU-*, 144,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P168TGMU-*, 168,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P192TGMU-*, 192,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P204TGMU-*, 204,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P216TGMU-*, 216,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PURY-P234TGMU-*, 234,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Y-Series Outdoor Equipment:* • PUHY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P108TGMU-*, 108,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P126TGMU-*, 126,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P144TGMU-*, 144,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P168TGMU-*, 168,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P192TGMU-*, 192,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P204TGMU-*, 204,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump • PUHY-P216TGMU-*, 216,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. • PUHY-P234TGMU-*, 234,000 Btu/h, 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump. *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System S-Series Outdoor Equipment:* • PUMY-P48NHMU-*, 48,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor Equipment:* • P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 split-system variable-capacity air conditioner or heat pump. • PCFY Series—Ceiling Suspended—PCFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-*. • PDFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted—PDFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24/30/36/48***-*. • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)—PEFY-P06/08/12***-*. • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High Static Option)—PEFY-P15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96***-*. • PEFY-F Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% OA Option)—PEFY-P 30/54/72/96***--*. • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Concealed)—PFFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24***-*. • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Exposed)—PFFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24***-*. • PKFY Series—Wall-Mounted—PKFY-P06/08/12/18/24/30***-*. • PLFY Series—4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PLFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-*. • PMFY Series—1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PMFY-P06/08/12/15[MR12]***-*.

(3)Alternate test procedure.

(A)MEUS shall be required to test the products listed in Paragraph

(2)above according to those test procedures for central air conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR Parts 430 and 431, except that:

(i)For products covered by 10 CFR Part 430 (consumer products), MEUS shall not be required to comply with:

(1)The first sentence in 10 CFR 430.24(m)(2), which refers to “that combination manufactured by the condensing unit manufacturer likely to have the highest volume of retail sales;” and

(2)the third sentence in 10 CFR 430(m)(2) and the provisions of 10 CFR 430(m)(2)(i) and (ii). Instead of testing the combinations likely to have the highest volume of retail sales, MEUS may test a “tested combination” selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph

(B)of this paragraph. Additionally, instead of following the provisions of 10 CFR 430(m)(2)(i) and

(ii)for every other system combination using the same outdoor unit as the tested combination, MEUS shall make representations concerning the R410A CITY MULTI products covered in this waiver according to the provisions of subparagraph

(C)below.

(ii)For products covered by 10 CFR Part 430 (consumer products), MEUS shall be required to comply with 10 CFR 430 Appendix M as amended in accordance with designated changes that are listed in the July 20, 2006 **Federal Register** Notice. 71 FR 41320, July 20, 2006. These designated changes are with respect to the following test procedure sections: 2.1, 2.2.3, 2.4.1, 3.2.4 (including Table 6), 3.6.4 (including Table 12), 4.1.4.2, and 4.2.4.2.

(iii)For products covered by 10 CFR Part 431 (commercial products), MEUS shall test a “tested combination” selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph

(B)of this paragraph. For every other system combination using the same outdoor unit as the tested combination, MEUS shall make representations concerning the R410A CITY MULTI products covered in this waiver according to the provisions of subparagraph

(C)below.

(B)Tested combination. The term “tested combination” means a sample basic model comprised of units that are production units, or are representative of production units, of the basic model being tested. For the purposes of this waiver, the tested combination shall have the following features:

(i)The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a tested combination shall consist of an outdoor unit that is matched with between 2 and 5 indoor units.

(ii)The indoor units shall—

(a)Represent the highest sales volume type models;

(b)Together, have a capacity between 95% and 105% of the capacity of the outdoor unit;

(c)Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50% of the capacity of the outdoor unit;

(d)Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer's specifications; and

(e)All have the same external static pressure[MR15].

(C)Representations. MEUS may make representations about the energy efficiency of CITY MULTI VRFZ products, for compliance, marketing, or other purposes, only to the extent that such representations are made consistent with the provisions outlined below:

(i)For CITY MULTI VRFZ combinations tested in accordance with this alternate test procedure, MEUS may make representations based on these test results.

(ii)For CITY MULTI VRFZ combinations that are not tested, MEUS may make representations which are based on the testing results for the tested combination and which are consistent with either of the two following methods, except that only method

(a)may be used, if available:

(a)Representation of non-tested combinations according to an Alternative Rating Method (“ARM”) approved by DOE.

(b)Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit.

(4)The waiver granted for MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products on August 27, 2004 17 is hereby amended to prohibit MEUS from making energy efficiency representations regarding its R22 CITY MULTI products unless such representations are made consistent with the provisions set forth in Paragraph

(3)above. 17 71 FR 14858 (March 24, 2006).

(5)This waiver shall remain in effect from the date of issuance of this Order until DOE prescribes final test procedures appropriate to the model series manufactured by MEUS and listed above.

(6)This waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of statements, representations, and documentary materials provided by the petitioner. This waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the petition is incorrect, or DOE determines that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy consumption characteristics. Issued in Washington, DC, on April 2, 2007. Alexander A. Karsner, Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. [FR Doc. E7-6608 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Commercial Water Source Heat Pump Test Procedure [Case No. CAC-015] AGENCY: Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy. ACTION: Notice of petition for waiver, granting of application for interim waiver, and request for comments. SUMMARY: Today's notice publishes a Petition for Waiver from Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc. (MEUS). This Petition for Waiver (hereafter “MEUS Petition”) requests a waiver of the Department of Energy (“DOE”) test procedures applicable to commercial package water source heat pumps. DOE is soliciting comments, data, and information with respect to the MEUS Petition. Today's notice also grants an Interim Waiver to MEUS, with an alternate test procedure, from the existing DOE test procedure applicable to commercial package water source heat pumps. DATES: DOE will accept comments, data, and information regarding this Petition for Waiver until, but no later than May 9, 2007. ADDRESSES: Please submit comments, identified by case number [CAC-015], by any of the following methods: • *Mail:* Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mailstop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. Telephone:

(202)586-2945. Please submit one signed original paper copy. • *Hand Delivery/Courier:* Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones, U.S. Department of Energy, Building Technologies Program, Room 1J-018, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121. • *E-mail:* *Michael.raymond@ee.doe.gov* . Include either the case number [CAC-015], and/or “MEUS Petition” in the subject line of the message. • *Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov* . Follow the instructions for submitting comments. *Instructions:* All submissions received must include the agency name and case number for this proceeding. Submit electronic comments in WordPerfect, Microsoft Word, PDF, or text (ASCII) file format and avoid the use of special characters or any form of encryption. Wherever possible, include the electronic signature of the author. Absent an electronic signature, comments submitted electronically must be followed and authenticated by submitting the signed original paper document. DOE does not accept telefacsimiles (faxes). Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner. 10 CFR 431.401(d)(2). The name and address of the petitioner of today's notice is: William Rau, Senior Vice President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced Products Division, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suwanee, GA 30024. According to 10 CFR 1004.11, any person submitting information that he or she believes to be confidential and exempt by law from public disclosure should submit two copies: one copy of the document including all the information believed to be confidential, and one copy of the document with the information believed to be confidential deleted. DOE will make its own determination about the confidential status of the information and treat it according to its determination. *Docket:* For access to the docket to read the background documents relevant to this matter, go to the U.S. Department of Energy, Forrestal Building, Room 1J-018 (Resource Room of the Building Technologies Program), 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC,

(202)586-2945, between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. Available documents include the following items: this notice; public comments received; the Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver; prior Department rulemakings regarding commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps; the prior MEUS Petition for Waiver, DOE's notice of the prior MEUS Petition for Waiver and the DOE Decision and Order (D&O) regarding the prior MEUS Petition, which is being published today. Please call Ms. Brenda Edwards-Jones at the above telephone number for additional information regarding visiting the Resource Room. Please note: DOE's Freedom of Information Reading Room (formerly Room 1E-190 at the Forrestal Building) is no longer housing rulemaking materials. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Michael G. Raymond, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Building Technologies Program, Mail Stop EE-2J, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121,

(202)586-9611; e-mail: *Michael.Raymond.ee.doe.gov* ; or Francine Pinto, Esq., U.S. Department of Energy, Office of General Counsel, Mail Stop GC-72, Forrestal Building, 1000 Independence Avenue, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0103,

(202)586-9507; e-mail: *Francine.Pinto@hq.doe.gov* . SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: I. Background and Authority II. Petition for Waiver III. Application for Interim Waiver IV. Alternate Test Procedure V. Summary and Request for Comments I. Background and Authority Title III of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act

(EPCA)sets forth a variety of provisions concerning energy efficiency. Part B of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6291-6309) provides for the ”Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products other than Automobiles.” Part C of Title III (42 U.S.C. 6311-6317) provides for an energy efficiency program entitled ”Certain Industrial Equipment,” which is similar to the program in Part B, and which includes commercial air conditioning equipment, packaged boilers, water heaters, and other types of commercial equipment. Today's notice involves commercial equipment under Part C. Part C provides for definitions, test procedures, labeling provisions, energy conservation standards, and the authority to require information and reports from manufacturers. With respect to test procedures, it generally authorizes the Secretary of Energy to prescribe test procedures that are reasonably designed to produce results which reflect energy efficiency, energy use and estimated operating costs, and that are not unduly burdensome to conduct. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(2)) MEUS's petition requests a waiver from the commercial test procedures for water source models of its CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning

(VRFZ)heat pump product line, which are sold for commercial use. For commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, EPCA provides that the test procedures shall be those generally accepted industry testing procedures or rating procedures developed or recognized by the Air-Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute

(ARI)or by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE), as referenced in ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 and in effect on June 30, 1992. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(A)) This section also provides for the Secretary of Energy to amend the test procedure for a product if the industry test procedure is amended, unless the Secretary determines that such a modified test procedure does not meet the statutory criteria. (42 U.S.C. 6314(a)(4)(B)) On October 21, 2004, DOE published a direct final rule adopting test procedures for commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment, effective December 20, 2004. 69 FR 61962, October 21, 2004. DOE adopted ISO Standard 13256-1, “Water-source heat pumps—Testing and rating for performance—Part 1: Water-to-air and brine-to-air heat pumps” for small commercial package water source heat pumps with capacities < 135,000 Btu/hr. 69 FR 61971. The capacities of MEUS's water source CITY MULTI VRFZ products sold for commercial use fall in the range from 65,000 to 135,000 Btu/hr, which is the range covered by the DOE test procedure, and ISO Standard 13256-1. DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for covered commercial equipment. The waiver provisions for commercial equipment are found at 10 CFR 431.401, and are substantively identical to those for covered consumer products. The waiver provisions allow the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (hereafter “Assistant Secretary”) to temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). The Assistant Secretary may grant the waiver subject to conditions, including adherence to alternate test procedures. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4) and (f)(4). Petitioners are to include in their petition any alternate test procedures known to evaluate the basic model in a manner representative of its energy consumption. 10 CFR 431.401(b)(1)(iii). Waivers generally remain in effect until final test procedure amendments become effective, thereby resolving the problem that is the subject of the waiver. The waiver process also allows the Assistant Secretary to grant an Interim Waiver from test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned DOE for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2). An Interim Waiver remains in effect for a period of 180 days or until DOE issues its determination on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180 days, if necessary. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4). II. Petition for Waiver On October 30, 2006, MEUS filed an Application for Interim Waiver and a Petition for Waiver from the test procedures applicable to commercial package water source heat pumps. In particular, MEUS requested a waiver from ISO Standard 13256-1, the commercial test procedure incorporated by reference that is the DOE test procedure. DOE has previously granted a waiver and an interim waiver from the applicable air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for other models of MEUS's CITY MULTI products. On August 27, 2004, DOE granted a waiver from the commercial air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI products, i.e., air-source CITY MULTI products using R22 as the refrigerant. 1 In March 2006, DOE granted MEUS's application for interim waiver and published MEUS's petition for waiver for its R410A CITY MULTI models, i.e., air-source CITY MULTI products using R410A as the refrigerant. 2 1 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver From the DOE Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure to Mitsubishi Electric (Case No. CAC-008), 69 FR 52660 (Aug. 27, 2004). 2 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-012), 71 FR 14858 (Mar. 24, 2006). On August 8, 2006, DOE published a notice correcting five of the model numbers in the interim waiver granted to MEUS and listed in MEUS's petition for waiver. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Notice of Correction of Petition for Waiver and Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures, and Modification of Interim Waiver, 71 FR 45047 (Aug. 8, 2006). The products covered by this petition represent the models of the CITY MULTI product line that use water, as opposed to air, as a heat source and heat sink. 3 MEUS claims that its water source models cannot be tested pursuant to the existing test procedure for the same reasons that its R22 models were previously granted a waiver by DOE. The only difference between the WR2 and WY products and the air source R22 and R410A products is the method of heat rejection. The WR2 and WY products have a heat source unit that uses water, instead of air, to reject heat. The indoor models, CITY MULTI Control Network, and system technology of the R22 and R410A products and the WR2 and WY models are identical. As a result, these products will face the same testing problems as MEUS's R22 and R410A CITY MULTI products. 3 Like the current line of air source CITY MULTI products, the water-source WR2 and WY model lines use R410A as the refrigerant. MEUS's line of CITY MULTI VRFZ system products are complete, commercial zoning systems that use variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, and system intelligence. The WR2 and WY systems have the capability of connecting a single heat source unit to up to 19 indoor units. This capability gives these systems millions of potential system combinations. 4 4 MEUS offers 58 indoor models in its WR2/WY CITY MULTI product line. The number of potential combinations of the 58 models in sets of up to 19 is an astronomical figure. The operating characteristics of a VRFZ system allow each indoor unit to have a different mode of operation (i.e., on/off/heat/cool/dry/auto/fan) and a different set temperature. In the WR2 and WY models, the variable speed compressor and the system controls direct refrigerant flow throughout the system to match the performance of the system to the load of the conditioned areas. The compressor is capable of reducing its operating capacity to as little as 16 percent of its rated capacity. Zone diversity enables these VRFZ systems to have a total connected indoor unit capacity of up to 150 percent of the capacity of the heat source unit. The CITY MULTI VRFZ systems have variable frequency inverter driven scroll compressors, and, therefore, have nearly infinite steps of capacity. While other system compressors run at full load as their normal state, the CITY MULTI VRFZ systems run at part-load [MR7] as their normal state. The WR2 Series CITY MULTI products also offer consumers the option of simultaneous heating and cooling. These simultaneous heating and cooling systems achieve energy benefits by transferring heat recovered from one zone into another zone needing heat. The MEUS petition requests that DOE grant a waiver from existing test procedures until such time as a representative test procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. MEUS requested that DOE apply an alternate test procedure based on the DOE alternate test procedure specified in the Decision & Order concerning MEUS' R410A CITY MULTI VRFZ products. III. Application for Interim Waiver MEUS also requested an Interim Waiver to allow it to introduce its new water source products in the U.S. market while DOE evaluates the Petition for Waiver. An Interim Waiver may be granted if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination on the Petition for Waiver. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(3). MEUS's Application for Interim Waiver does not provide sufficient information to evaluate what, if any, economic hardship MEUS will likely experience if its Application for Interim Waiver is denied. However, in those instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has been demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a waiver for a similar product design, it is in the public interest to have similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a comparable basis. MEUS's water source CITY MULTI VRFZ products are similar to the MEUS products previously granted a waiver, MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products (the indoor units are the same in both lines). 69 FR 52660. The previous MEUS waiver was granted because MEUS's R22 products cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures, for two reasons:

(1)Test laboratories cannot test products with so many indoor units (the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI VRFZ systems can connect an outdoor unit with up to 19 indoor units); and

(2)there are too many possible combinations of indoor and outdoor units (MEUS offers 58 indoor unit models, allowing for well over 1,000,000 combinations for each outdoor unit), and it is impractical to test so many combinations. The same argument, with the same two reasons, applies equally to show that MEUS' water source CITY MULTI VRFZ products cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures. These identical testing problems make it likely that MEUS' Petition for Waiver will be granted. Therefore, MEUS's Application for an Interim Waiver from DOE test procedure for its new WR2 and WY water source CITY MULTI VRFZ systems is granted. The letter to MEUS granting the Interim Waiver specifies that MEUS must use the alternate test procedure proposed in today's Notice. Hence, it is ordered that: The Application for Interim Waiver filed by MEUS is hereby granted for MEUS's new WR2 and WY water source CITY MULTI VRFZ central air conditioning heat pumps. For the below listed models:

(1)MEUS shall not be required to test or rate its water source CITY MULTI VRFZ products on the basis of the currently applicable test procedure, which incorporates by reference ISO 13256-1 (1998).

(2)MEUS shall be required to test and rate its water source CITY MULTI VFRZ products according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in section IV (3), “Alternate test procedure.” *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System WR2-Series Heat Source Units:* • PQRY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump • PQRY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System WY-Series Heat Source Units:* • PQHY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump • PQHY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor Equipment:* • P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 split-system variable-capacity heat pump. • PCFY Series—Ceiling Suspended—PCFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-* • PDFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted—PDFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24/30/36/48***-* • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)—PEFY-P06/08/12***-* • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High Static Option)—PEFY-P15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96***-* • PEFY-F Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% Outside Air Ventilation Option)—PEFY-P 30/54/72/96***-*-* • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Concealed)—PFFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24***-* • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Exposed)—PFFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24***-* • PKFY Series—Wall-Mounted—PKFY-P06/08/12/18/24/30***-* • PLFY Series—4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PLFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-* • PMFY Series—1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PMFY-P06/08/12/15***-* This Interim Waiver is conditioned upon the presumed validity of statements, representations, and documentary materials provided by the petitioner. This Interim Waiver may be revoked or modified at any time upon a determination that the factual basis underlying the petition is incorrect, or DOE determines that the results from the alternate test procedure are unrepresentative of the basic models' true energy consumption characteristics. This Interim Waiver shall remain in effect for a period of 180 days or until DOE acts on the Petition for Waiver, whichever is sooner, and may be extended for an additional 180-day period, if necessary. 10 CFR 431.401(e)(4). IV. Alternate Test Procedure Consistent representations are important for manufacturers to make claims about the energy efficiency of their products. In response to MEUS's petition for waiver for the R410A products, today, DOE is also publishing an alternate test procedure to provide a basis upon which MEUS can test its equipment and make valid energy efficiency representations. DOE [MR9] will consider applying a similar alternate test procedure for MEUS's WR2 and WY products in order to allow MEUS to test and make energy efficiency representations regarding these comparable products. As noted above, existing testing facilities have a limited ability to test multiple indoor units at one time, and the number of possible combination of indoor and outdoor units for some variable refrigerant zoning systems is impractical to test. Subsequent to the waiver that DOE granted for MEUS's R22 models, ARI developed a committee to discuss the issue and work on developing an appropriate test protocol for variable refrigerant zoning systems. However, to date, no additional test methodologies have been adopted by the committee or put forth to DOE. DOE believes that an alternate test procedure is needed so that manufacturers can make representations for their products. DOE specified an alternate test procedure in the MEUS waiver for R410A CITY MULTI products, and is proposing to include the following similar waiver language in the final Decision and Order for the water source models: “(1) The Petition for Waiver” filed by Mitsubishi Electric and Electronics USA, Inc.

(MEUS)is hereby granted as set forth in the paragraphs below.

(2)MEUS shall not be required to test or rate the water source WR2 and WY CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System

(VFRZ)products covered in this waiver on the basis of the currently applicable test procedure, but shall be required to test and rate its water source CITY MULTI VFRZ products covered in this waiver according to the alternate test procedure as set forth in paragraph (3).

(3)Alternate test procedure.

(A)MEUS shall be required to test its water source WR2 and WY CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System

(VFRZ)products according to those test procedures for central air conditioners and heat pumps prescribed by DOE at 10 CFR Part 431, except that:

(i)MEUS shall test a “tested combination” selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph

(B)of this paragraph. For every other system combination using the same outdoor unit as [MR11] the tested combination, MEUS shall make representations concerning the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products covered in this waiver according to the provisions of subparagraph

(C)below.

(i)The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a tested combination shall consist of an outdoor unit that is matched with between 2 and 5 indoor units.

(ii)The indoor units shall—

(a)Represent the highest sales volume type models;

(b)Together, have a capacity between 95% and 105% of the capacity of the outdoor unit;

(c)Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50% of the capacity of the outdoor unit;

(d)Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer's specifications; and

(e)All have the same external static pressure.

(C)Representations. MEUS may make representations about the energy efficiency of CITY MULTI VRFZ products [MR15] , for compliance, marketing, or other purposes, only to the extent that such representations are made consistent with the provisions outlined below:

(i)For CITY MULTI VRFZ combinations tested in accordance with the alternate test procedure, MEUS may make representations based on these test results.

(a)may be used, if available:

(a)Representation of non-tested combinations according to an Alternative Rating Method (“ARM”) approved by DOE.

(b)Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy efficiency level as the tested combination with the same outdoor unit. V. Summary and Request for Comments Today's notice announces a MEUS Petition for Waiver and grants MEUS an Interim Waiver from the test procedures applicable to MEUS's WR2 and WY water source CITY MULTI heat pump units. DOE is publishing the MEUS Petition for Waiver in its entirety. The petition contains no confidential information. Furthermore, today's notice includes an alternate test procedure that DOE is considering including in the final Decision and Order. In this alternate test procedure, DOE proposes defining a “tested combination” which MEUS could test in lieu of testing all retail combinations of its water source VRFZ CITY MULTI products. Furthermore, should a manufacturer not be able to test all retail combinations, DOE proposes allowing manufacturers to rate waived products according to an alternate rating method approved by DOE, or to rate waived products the same as that for the specified tested combination. DOE will also consider applying a similar alternate test procedure to other comparable petitions for waiver for residential and commercial central air conditioners and heat pumps. Such cases include Samsung's petition for its DVM products (70 FR 9629, February 28, 2005), and Fujitsu's petition for its Airstage variable refrigerant flow

(VRF)products (70 FR 5980, February 4, 2005). DOE is interested in receiving comments on all aspects of this notice. Any person submitting written comments must also send a copy of such comments to the petitioner, whose contact information is cited above. 10 CFR 431.401(d)(2). Issued in Washington, DC, on April 2, 2007. Alexander A. Karsner, Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. October 30, 2006. The Honorable Alexander Karsner, *Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave, SW., Washington, DC 20585-0121.* Re: *Petition for Waiver of Test Procedures and Application for Interim Waiver for CITY MULTI VRFZ Water-Source Heat Pumps* Dear Assistant Secretary Karsner: Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc.

(MEUS)respectfully submits this petition for waiver, and application for interim waiver, of the test procedures applicable to the WR2 and WY Series models of MEUS's CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning

(VRFZ)product line pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 431.401 (2006). The WR2 and WY models are water-source products. The Department of Energy (DOE or Department) has previously granted a waiver and an interim waiver from the applicable air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for other models of MEUS's CITY MULTI products. On August 27, 2004, DOE granted a waiver from the commercial air conditioner and heat pump test procedures for MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI products, i.e., air-source CITY MULTI products using R22 as the refrigerant. 5 In March 2006, the Department granted MEUS's application for interim waiver and published MEUS's petition for waiver for its R410A CITY MULTI models, i.e., air-source CITY MULTI products using R410A as the refrigerant. 6 5 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Decision and Order Granting a Waiver From the DOE Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedure to Mitsubishi Electric (Case No. CAC-008), 69 FR 52660 (Aug. 27, 2004) (copy attached) (hereinafter, 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver). 6 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-012), 71 FR 14858 (Mar. 24, 2006) (hereinafter, R410A Interim Waiver). On August 8, 2006, DOE published a notice correcting five of the model numbers in the interim waiver granted to MEUS and listed in MEUS's petition for waiver. Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Notice of Correction of Petition for Waiver and Interim Waiver of Mitsubishi Electric From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures, and Modification of Interim Waiver, 71 FR 45047 (Aug. 8, 2006). As of the date of this letter, MEUS's petition for waiver for its R410A CITY MULTI models is still pending before DOE. The products covered by this petition represent the models of the CITY MULTI product line that use water, as opposed to air, as a heat source and heat sink. 7 Like the CITY MULTI products covered by the earlier waiver, the products covered by this petition cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures, and, therefore, should be granted a waiver from the applicable test procedures. MEUS simultaneously requests an interim waiver covering these WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products. 7 Like the current line of air source CITY MULTI products, the water-source WR2 and WY model lines also use R410A as the refrigerant. I. Background In the 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver, DOE found that the waiver should be granted because the CITY MULTI products have “one or more design characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures.” 8 MEUS's R22 products cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures for two reasons:

(1)the test laboratories cannot test products with so many indoor units; and

(2)there are too many possible combinations of indoor and outdoor units (well over 1,000,000 combinations for each outdoor unit), and it is impractical to test so many combinations. 9 Pursuant to the 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver, MEUS is not required to test or rate its CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning system products listed on the basis of the currently applicable test procedures. 10 In granting MEUS's request for an interim waiver for the R410A CITY MULTI products, DOE concluded that the R410A “systems will likely suffer the same testing problems that prompted the Department to grant MEUS the waiver for its R22 products.” 11 8 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver at 52662. *See* also 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) (2005). 9 R410A Interim Waiver at 14860. 10 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver at 52662. 11 R410A Interim Waiver at 14861. The R410A CITY MULTI products are substitutes for the R22 CITY MULTI products that use the R410A refrigerant instead of the R22 refrigerant. MEUS's WR2 and WY products represent the models of the CITY MULTI product line that are water-source heat pumps. The only difference between the WR2 and WY products, on the one hand, and the R410A products is the method of heat rejection. The WR2 and WY products have a heat source unit that uses water, instead of air, to reject heat. The indoor models, CITY MULTI Control Network, and system technology of the R410A products and the WR2 and WY models are identical. As a result, these products will face the same testing problems as those suffered by MEUS's R22 and R410A CITY MULTI products. II. WR2/WY Model Design Characteristics MEUS's line of CITY MULTI VRFZ system products combines advanced technologies and are complete, commercial zoning systems that save energy through the effective use of variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, and system intelligence. The WR2 and WY systems have the capability of connecting a single heat source unit to up to 19 indoor units. This capability gives these systems tremendous installation flexibility with millions of potential system combinations. 12 12 MEUS offers 58 indoor models in its WR2/WY CITY MULTI product line. The number of potential combinations of the 58 models in sets of up to 19 is an astronomical figure. The operating characteristics of a VRFZ system allow each indoor unit to have a different mode of operation (i.e., on/off/heat/cool/dry/auto/fan) and a different set temperature allowing great flexibility of operation. In the WR2 and WY models, the variable speed compressor and the system controls direct refrigerant flow throughout the system to precisely match the performance of the system to the load of the conditioned areas. The compressor is capable of reducing its operating capacity to as little as 16% of its rated capacity. Zone diversity enables these VRFZ systems to have a total connected indoor unit capacity of up to 150% of the capacity of the heat source unit. The CITY MULTI VRFZ systems have variable frequency inverter driven scroll compressors, and, therefore, have nearly infinite steps of capacity. While other system compressors run at full load as their normal state, the CITY MULTI VRFZ systems run at part load as their normal state. The WR2 Series CITY MULTI products also offer consumers the option of simultaneous heating and cooling. These simultaneous heating and cooling systems achieve energy benefits by transferring heat recovered from one zone into another zone needing heat. Additionally, when the system switches between the heating and cooling modes, the direction of the cooling water flow remains the same; therefore, the compressor does not need to be shut down when switching modes. MEUS's CITY MULTI VRFZ systems were designed to take into account the customers' specific needs for flexibility, variable conditioning, and operating energy savings. Since these products were first introduced in U.S. markets, the CITY MULTI systems have become an important part of MEUS sales. These systems have been well received in Asia, Europe, Latin America, and the United States because of their highly effective energy saving features. Through the use of highly advanced technology, the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI VRFZ systems offer cost-effective functionality and significant energy savings. The unique design and intelligence provided by the sophisticated direct digital control system allow the systems to use less energy than conventional systems to condition a given area, thus costing the customer less to operate. Although these energy saving characteristics are not credited under current rules, they are precisely the types of technological innovations and applications that advance the Congressional intent of promoting energy savings. These CITY MULTI VRFZ systems represent a revolutionary advance in HVAC technology, well positioned to provide new and existing commercial buildings with effective use of energy and an operationally cost-effective source of heating and cooling. Additionally, with some of the innovative capabilities of the CITY MULTI Controls Network, the potential for energy management and energy savings are even greater. The CITY MULTI products' unique design characteristics are clearly consistent with U.S. government's efforts to encourage the availability of high performance products that consume less energy. III. Test Procedures From Which Waiver Is Requested MEUS's petition requests waiver from the applicable test procedures for its WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products. DOE's regulations provide the test procedures for small and large commercial package air conditioning and heating equipment. 13 Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.96, the test procedures applicable to small commercial packaged air conditioning and heating water-source heat pumps, with capacities between 65,000 and 135,000 Btu/h, are those included in ISO Standard 13256-1 (1998). 14 The capacities of MEUS's WR2 and WY CITY MULTI water-source products covered by this petition fall in that range. Therefore, MEUS requests waiver from ISO Standard 13256-1 (1998), as incorporated by reference in DOE's regulations. 15 13 10 CFR 431.96 ( *see* Tables 1 and 2). 14 10 CFR 431.96, Table 1. 15 While DOE's regulations do not provide specific definitions for water-source heat pumps and water-cooled air conditioners, pursuant to the definitions provided in ARI Standard 340/360—2000, Standard for Commercial and Industrial Unitary Air-Conditioning and Heat Pump Equipment, and in ISO Standard 13256-1 (1998), Water-source heat pumps—testing and rating for performance—Part I: Water-to-air and brine-to-air heat pumps, MEUS believes that ISO Standard 13256-1

(1998)contains the test procedures applicable to its WR2 and WY CITY MULTI water-source heat pump products. Note, however, that the rationale for granting the requested test procedure waiver is identical regardless of whether the applicable test procedure is ISO Standard 13256-1 or ARI Standard 340/360. IV. Basic Models for Which Waiver Is Requested MEUS requests a waiver from the test procedures for the basic models consisting of combinations of the following products: 16 16 The * denotes engineering differences in the models. *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System WR2-Series Heat Source Units:* • PQRY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump • PQRY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System WY-Series Heat Source Units:* • PQHY-P72TGMU-*, 72,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump • PQHY-P96TGMU-*, 96,000 Btu/h 208/230-3-60 split-system variable-speed heat pump *CITY MULTI Variable Refrigerant Flow Zoning System Indoor Equipment:* • P*FY models, ranging from 6,000 to 96,000 Btu/h, 208/230-1-60 split-system variable-capacity heat pump. • PCFY Series—Ceiling Suspended—PCFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-* • PDFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted—PDFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24/30/36/48***-* • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Low Profile)—PEFY-P06/08/12***-* • PEFY Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (Alternate High Static Option)—PEFY-P15/18/24/27/30/36/48/54/72/96***-* • PEFY-F Series—Ceiling Concealed Ducted (100% Outside Air Ventilation Option)—PEFY-P 30/54/72/96***-*-* • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Concealed)—PFFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24***-* • PFFY Series—Floor Standing (Exposed)—PFFY-P06/08/12/15/18/24***-* • PKFY Series—Wall-Mounted—PKFY-P06/08/12/18/24/30***-* • PLFY Series—4-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PLFY-P12/18/24/30/36***-* • PMFY Series—1-Way Airflow Ceiling Cassette—PMFY-P06/08/12/15***-* V. Need for Waiver of Test Procedures The Department's regulations contain provisions allowing a person to seek a waiver from the test procedure requirements for commercial equipment. These provisions are set forth in 10 CFR 431.401. The waiver provisions allow DOE to temporarily waive test procedures for a particular basic model when a petitioner shows that the basic model contains one or more design characteristics that prevent testing according to the prescribed test procedures, or when the prescribed test procedures may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data. 17 17 10 CFR 431.401(a)(1). In the 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver, DOE found that MEUS's CITY MULTI products contained “one or more design characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures.” 18 DOE granted MEUS's request for an interim waiver for the R410A CITY MULTI products because the R410A systems “will likely suffer the same testing problems” as the R22 products. 19 The WR2 and WY models of CITY MULTI products have the same operational characteristics as the R22 CITY MULTI products, which have already been granted a waiver, and the R410A CITY MULTI products, which have been granted an interim waiver, except that the WR2 and WY models are water-source heat pumps. Therefore, the same design characteristics that prevent testing of the basic R22 and R410A CITY MULTI models also prevent testing of the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI models. Thus, similar to the R22 and R410A models, the WR2 and WY systems can connect more indoor units than the test laboratories can physically test at one time. Additionally, it is not practical to test all of the potentially available combinations, of which there are more than one million. Therefore, the same design characteristics that prevent testing of the basic R22 and R410A CITY MULTI models also prevent testing of the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI models. 18 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver at 52662. 19 R410A Interim Waiver at 14861. Specifically, in the 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver, DOE found that: The current test procedures can be used to test all current commercial systems in the laboratory, but many VFRZ systems cannot be tested in the laboratory. Each VFRZ outdoor unit can be connected with up to sixteen separate indoor units in a zoned system. Existing test laboratories cannot test more than five indoor units at a time, and even that number is difficult. A second difficulty is that MEUS offers 58 indoor unit models. Each of these indoor unit models is designed to be used with up to 15 other indoor units, which need not be the same models, in combination with a single outdoor unit. For each of the CITY MULTI VRFZ outdoor coils, there are well over 1,000,000 combinations of indoor coils that can be matched up in a system configuration, and it is highly impractical to test so many combinations. There are therefore two major testing problems:

(1)Test laboratories cannot test products with so many indoor units; and

(2)there are too many possible combinations of indoor and outdoor units—only a small fraction of the combinations could be tested. These problems * * * support the * * * waiver criterion, that “the basic model contains one or more design characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures. * * *” 20 20 ID. at 52661-61. In granting an interim waiver for MEUS's R410A models, DOE stated that the R410A products “are quite similar to * * * MEUS's R22 CITY MULTI VRFZ products,” 21 and that the R410A systems “will likely suffer the same testing problems that prompted the Department to grant MEUS the waiver for its R22 products.” 22 21 R410A Interim Waiver at 14860. 22 R410A Interim Waiver at 14861. For the same reasons, the WR2 and WY models cannot be tested pursuant to the existing test procedures. Similar to the R22 and R410A models, the WR2 and WY systems can connect more indoor units than the test laboratories can physically test at one time. Each of the WR2 and WY indoor units is designed to be used with up to 18 other indoor units with each heat source unit. These connected indoor units need not be the same models—there are 58 different indoor models that can be combined in a multitude of different combinations to address customer needs. The testing laboratories will not physically be able to test many of the WR2 and WY system combinations because of the inability to test products with so many indoor units. In addition, it is not practical to test all of the potentially available combinations. With the capability of potentially connecting a single heat source unit to up to 19 indoor units, the WR2 and WY units are designed to be combined in literally millions of different system configurations. 23 The test procedures provide no mechanism for sampling component combinations. Thus, the test procedures do not contemplate, and cannot practicably be applied to, the CITY MULTI VRFZ systems consisting of multiple assemblies that are intended to be used in a very large number of different combinations. 23 Even for systems with 4 or fewer indoor units, which can technically be tested in the laboratories, there are far too many possible combinations to make testing practicable because there are 58 different indoor models that can be used in combination. For instance, selecting four indoor units from among 40 indoor model choices produces over one hundred thousand possible combinations. As shown above, the WR2 and WY products cannot be tested according to the prescribed test procedures. MEUS also believes that the requested waiver is supported on the grounds that the test procedures “may evaluate the basic model in a manner so unrepresentative of its true energy consumption characteristics * * * as to provide materially inaccurate comparative data.” 24 In particular, the benefits of variable refrigerant control and distribution, zoning diversity, part load operation and simultaneous heating and cooling, as described in Section II above, are not credited under the current test procedures. 24 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) (2005). In any case, it should be noted that these CITY MULTI products employ advanced technologies and their marketing will advance the Energy Policy and Conservation Act's

(EPCA)goal of promoting energy efficiency. Testing procedures should not inhibit the commercial success of these products in the United States. Without a waiver of the test procedures, MEUS will be at a competitive disadvantage in the market. Consumers have come to expect the availability of the CITY MULTI products in the U.S. marketplace, and a significant number of engineers and contractors are currently requesting these new WR2 and WY units for their projects because of the great advantages they offer. Thus, MEUS respectfully requests that DOE grant a waiver from the applicable test procedures to the products listed in Section IV. 25 MEUS plans to introduce these units into the U.S. market early in the first quarter of 2007, and, therefore, requests that DOE act on this request in a timely fashion. 25 Pursuant to EPCA, MEUS will not make representations regarding the energy efficiency of the products covered by a waiver except as may be specifically authorized by DOE. VI. Alternative Test Procedures Currently, there are no test procedures known to MEUS that can accurately evaluate these products. However, in response to MEUS's petition for waiver for the R410A products, DOE proposed an alternate test procedure to provide a conservative basis from which manufacturers covered by a test procedure waiver for VRFZ products can test and make valid energy efficiency representations, for compliance, marketing, or other purposes, regarding these products. 26 MEUS requests that DOE apply a similar alternate test procedure for MEUS's WR2 and WY products in order to allow MEUS to test and make energy efficiency representations regarding these products. 26 R410A Interim Waiver at 14861-3. Manufacturers face restrictions with respect to making representations about the energy consumption and energy consumption costs of products covered by EPCA. 27 As DOE acknowledged in the R410A Interim Waiver, “consistent representations are important for manufacturers to make claims about the energy efficiency of their products.” 28 Manufacturers need the ability to make energy efficiency representations to determine compliance with state and local energy codes and regulatory requirements, and to provide consumers with valuable purchasing information. Therefore, MEUS respectfully requests that DOE apply the alternate test procedure described below. 27 *See* 42 U.S.C. 6314(d); 42 U.S.C. 6293(c). 28 R410A Interim Waiver at 14861. The proposed alternate test procedure will permit MEUS to designate a “tested combination” for each model of heat source unit with parameters on the indoor units that can be used in the tested combination. This tested combination must be tested according to the applicable DOE test procedures. Additionally, the alternate test procedure will permit MEUS to represent the energy efficiency for a non-tested combination in three ways. MEUS may represent the energy efficiency of a non-tested combination:

(1)at an energy efficiency level determined under a DOE-approved alternate rating method;

(2)at the efficiency level of the tested combination utilizing the same heat source unit; or

(3)at the DOE prescribed minimum efficiency level for the product class, assuming the tested combination meets or exceeds this minimum level. Allowing MEUS to make energy efficiency representations for non-tested combinations that are consistent with any of the three methods described above is reasonable because the heat source unit is the principal efficiency driver. The alternate test procedure tends to rate these products very conservatively because it does not credit significant energy saving characteristics of these products. The multi-zoning feature of these products, which enables them to cool only those portions of the building that require cooling, uses less energy than if the whole building must be cooled when cooling is required. Additionally, the test procedure requires full load testing, which disadvantages these products because they are optimized for best efficiency when operating with less than full loads. In fact, these products normally operate at part-load conditions. Finally, the test procedure does not recognize the benefits of products capable of simultaneous heating and cooling, which is more efficient than requiring all zones to be either heated or cooled. Therefore, since the proposed alternate test procedure does not credit the savings from zoning, part-load operation, or simultaneous heating and cooling, it will provide a conservative basis for assessing the energy efficiency for such products. MEUS requests that DOE apply the following proposed alternate test procedure, which is based on the one proposed in April 2006, 29 to MEUS's CITY MULTI WR2 and WY products: 29 R410A Interim Waiver at 14861-3. Alternate Test Procedure

(A)MEUS shall be required to test the products listed above according to the test procedures provided for in 10 CFR 431.96, except that:

(i)MEUS may test a “tested combination” selected in accordance with the provisions of subparagraph

(B)of this paragraph. For every other system combination using the same heat source unit as the tested combination, MEUS shall make representations concerning the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products covered in this waiver according to the provisions of subparagraph

(C)below.

(i)The basic model of a variable refrigerant flow system used as a tested combination shall consist of a heat source unit that is matched with between 2 and 5 indoor units.

(ii)The indoor units shall—

(a)Represent the highest sales volume type models;

(b)Together, have a capacity between 95% and 105% of the capacity of the heat source unit;

(c)Not, individually, have a capacity greater than 50% of the capacity of the heat source unit;

(d)Have a fan speed that is consistent with the manufacturer's specifications; and

(e)All have the same external static pressure.

(C)Representations. MEUS may make representations about the energy efficiency of WR2 and WY CITY MULTI VRFZ products, for compliance, marketing, or other purposes, only to the extent that such representations are made consistent with the provisions outlined below:

(i)For WR2 and WY CITY MULTI VRFZ combinations tested in accordance with this paragraph, MEUS may make representations based on these test results.

(ii)For WR2 and WY CITY MULTI VRFZ combinations that are not tested, MEUS may make representations which are based on the testing results for the tested combination and which are consistent with any of the three following methods:

(a)Representation of non-tested combinations according to an Alternative Rating Method (“ARM”) approved by DOE.

(b)Representation of non-tested combinations at the same energy efficiency level as the tested combination with the same heat source unit.

(c)Representation of non-tested combinations at the DOE prescribed minimum efficiency level for the product class if the tested combination using the same heat source unit meets or exceeds that level. VII. Similar Products To the best of our knowledge, water-source VRFZ products are also offered in the United States by Daikin U.S. Corporation. This manufacturer, however, has incorporated a different technology to achieve variable refrigerant flow. VIII. Application for Interim Waiver Pursuant to 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2), MEUS also submits an application for interim waiver of the applicable test procedures for the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI models listed above. DOE's regulations contain provisions allowing DOE to grant an interim waiver from the test procedure requirements to manufacturers that have petitioned the Department for a waiver of such prescribed test procedures. 30 As DOE has previously stated, “an Interim Waiver will be granted if it is determined that the applicant will experience economic hardship if the Application for Interim Waiver is denied, if it appears likely that the Petition for Waiver will be granted, and/or the Assistant Secretary determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination for the Petition for Waiver.” 31 MEUS will experience economic hardship if the application for interim waiver is denied. Additionally, precedent indicates that DOE will likely grant MEUS's petition for waiver. Finally, it is in the public interest to grant an interim waiver. Therefore, MEUS respectfully requests DOE to grant the application for interim waiver. 30 10 CFR 431.401(a)(2). 31 Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver and Granting of the Application for Interim Waiver of Samsung Air Conditioning From the DOE Residential and Commercial Package Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-009), 70 FR 9629, at 9630 (Feb. 28, 2005) (Samsung Interim Waiver). *See* 10 CFR 431.201(e)(3) (2005). *See* also R410A Interim Waiver at 14860. MEUS plans to introduce the new WR2 and WY products into the U.S. market early in the first quarter of 2007. The procedure for granting a petition for waiver is a time-consuming process—DOE must publish the petition in the **Federal Register** , allow time for public comment, and then consider any comments before it makes a decision. Thus, the process typically takes a number of months. If an interim waiver is not granted, MEUS will suffer economic hardship because MEUS will be required to delay its introduction of these products to U.S. customers. In addition, DOE will likely grant MEUS's petition for waiver. As described above, the design characteristics which prevented testing of the basic model of the products listed in the 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver and the R410A Interim Waiver are present for the new WR2 and WY models as well. The best evidence that DOE is likely to grant this waiver petition is the fact that it granted a similar petition in the 2004 CITY MULTI Waiver, and granted an interim waiver for the R410A products on the basis that “it appears likely that the [R410A] Petition for Waiver will be granted.” 32 DOE also granted an interim waiver to Samsung Air Conditioning in 2005 stating that Samsung's petition would likely be granted because Samsung's products are quite similar to the MEUS's CITY MULTI products, for which DOE already granted a waiver. 33 32 R410A Interim Waiver at 14860. 33 Samsung Interim Waiver at 9630. Finally, DOE's regulations state that the Assistant Secretary may grant an interim waiver if he determines that it would be desirable for public policy reasons to grant immediate relief pending a determination for the Petition for Waiver. In response to MEUS's Application for Interim Waiver for its R410A products, DOE stated that “in those instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has been demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a waiver for a similar product design, it is in the public interest to have similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a comparable basis.” 34 MEUS's WR2 and WY CITY MULTI products are similar to the R22 and R410A CITY MULTI products, as well as the products for which Samsung Air Conditioning and Fujitsu General Limited were granted interim waivers, 35 and they will suffer the same testing obstacles as those products. 34 R410A Interim Waiver at 14860. DOE made the same statement in the Samsung Interim Waiver, concluding that “in those instances where the likely success of the Petition for Waiver has been demonstrated, based upon DOE having granted a waiver for a similar product design, it is in the public interest to have similar products tested and rated for energy consumption on a comparable basis.” 70 FR at 9630. 35 Samsung Interim Waiver; Energy Conservation Program for Consumer Products: Publication of the Petition for Waiver of Fujitsu General Limited From the DOE Residential Air Conditioner and Heat Pump Test Procedures (Case No. CAC-010), 70 FR 5980 (Feb. 4, 2005). Therefore, since it is in the public interest to have similar products tested and rated on a comparable basis, DOE should grant MEUS's Application for Interim Waiver. IX. Conclusion MEUS seeks a waiver of the applicable test procedures for the products listed in Section IV above. Such a waiver is necessary because the basic WR2 and WY CITY MULTI models “contain[] one or more design characteristics which * * * prevent testing of the basic model according to the prescribed test procedures.” 36 MEUS respectfully asks the Department of Energy to grant a waiver from existing test standards until such time as an appropriate test procedure is developed and adopted for this class of products. MEUS expects to continue working with ARI and DOE to develop appropriate test procedures. 36 10 CFR 431.201(a)(1) (2005). MEUS further requests DOE to grant its request for an interim waiver while its Petition for Waiver is pending. If you have any questions or would like to discuss this request, please contact Paul Doppel, at

(678)376-2923, or Douglas Smith at

(202)298-1902. We greatly appreciate your attention to this matter. Sincerely, William Rau, *Senior Vice President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced Products Division, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 4300 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suwanee, GA 30024.* Mitsubishi Electric Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. HVAC Advanced Products Division 3400 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suwanee, GA 30024 CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing Petition for Waiver and Application for Interim Waiver upon the following company known to Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc. to currently market systems in the United States which appear to be similar to the WR2 and WY CITY MULTI VRFZ system design. I have notified this manufacturer that the Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy will receive and consider timely written comments on the Application for Interim Waiver. Daikin AC (Americas), Inc., *1645 Wallace Drive, Suite 110, Carrollton, TX 75006, Attn: Mike Bregenzer, VP and GM.* Dated this 30th day of October 2006. William Rau, *Senior Vice President and General Manager, HVAC Advanced Products Division, Mitsubishi Electric & Electronics USA, Inc., 3400 Lawrenceville-Suwanee Road, Suwanee, GA 30024.* [FR Doc. E7-6628 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6450-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [IC07-580-001, FERC Form 580] Commission Information Collection Activities, Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Extension April 3, 2007. AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DOE. ACTION: Notice. SUMMARY: In compliance with the requirements of section 3507 of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3507, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (Commission) has submitted the information collection described below to the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB)for review and extension of this information collection requirement. Any interested person may file comments directly with OMB and should address a copy of those comments to the Commission as explained below. The Commission received comments from two entities in response to an earlier **Federal Register** notice of December 14, 2006 (71 FR 75238-75239) and has provided responses to the commenters in its submission to OMB. Copies of the submission were also submitted to the commenters. DATES: Comments on the collection of information are due by May 7, 2007. ADDRESSES: Address comments on the collection of information to the Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Desk Officer. Comments to OMB should be filed electronically, c/o *oira_submission@omb.eop.gov* and include the OMB Control No. as a point of reference. The Desk Officer may be reached by telephone at 202-395-4650. A copy of the comments should also be sent to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Office of the Executive Director, ED-34, Attention: Michael Miller, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. Comments may be filed either in paper format or electronically. Those persons filing electronically do not need to make a paper filing. For paper filings an original and 14 copies, of such comments should be submitted to the Secretary of the Commission, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426 and should refer to Docket No. IC07-580-001. Documents filed electronically via the Internet must be prepared in WordPerfect, MS Word, Portable Document Format, or ASCII format. To file the document, access the Commission's Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* and click on “Make an E-Filing,” and then follow the instructions for each screen. First time users will have to establish a user name and password. The Commission will send an automatic acknowledgement to the sender's e-mail address upon receipt of comments. User assistance for electronic filings is available at 202-502-8258 or by e-mail to *efiling@ferc.gov.* Comments should not be submitted to this e-mail address. All comments may be viewed, printed or downloaded remotely via the Internet through FERC's homepage using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For user assistance, contact *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or toll-free at

(866)208-3676. or for TTY, contact

(202)502-8659. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Miller may be reached by telephone at

(202)502-8415, by fax at

(202)273-0873, and by e-mail at *michael.miller@ferc.gov.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Description The information collection submitted for OMB review contains the following: 1. *Collection of Information:* FERC 580 “Interrogatory on Fuel and Energy Purchase Practices, Docket No. IN79-6”. 2. *Sponsor:* Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. 3. *Control No.:* 1902-0137. The Commission is now requesting that OMB approve and extend the expiration date for an additional three years with no changes to the existing collection. The information filed with the Commission is mandatory. 4. *Necessity of the Collection of Information:* Submission of the information is necessary for the Commission to carry out its responsibilities in implementing the statutory provisions of the Federal Power Act (FPA). The FPA was amended by the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (49 Stat.851; 16 U.S.C. 824d) to require the Commission to review “not less frequently than every two

(2)years * * * of practices * * * to ensure efficient use of resources (including economical purchase and use of fuel and electric energy) * * *” The collection of this information is specifically required by Federal statue (FPA Section 205(f)) and thus the Commission lacks authority to allow waivers for the filing of this information. In addition, the Commission entertains requests for confidential treatment pursuant to 18 CFR 388.112 for the coal mine price data and coal rail transportation cost data submitted in response to questions 3(i) and 3(1.2), respectively, only when disclosure would violate the terms of a confidentiality clause of a rail transportation contract. No other requests for confidential treatment are considered. The information is used to:

(1)Review as mandated by statute, fuel purchase and cost recovery practices to ensure efficient use of resources, including economical purchase and use of fuel and electric energy, under fuel adjustment clauses on file with the Commission;

(2)evaluate fuel costs in individual rate filings;

(3)to supplement periodic utility audits. The information has also been used by the Energy Information Administration under a Congressional mandate to study various aspects of coal, oil, and gas transportation rates. 5. *Respondent Description:* The respondent universe currently comprises 114 companies (on average) subject to the Commission's jurisdiction. 6. *Estimated Burden:* 3,600 total hours, 114 respondents (average), 57 responses per respondent, and 63.16 hour per response (rounded off and average time) 7. *Estimated Cost Burden to respondents:* 3,600 hours/2080 hours per years × $122,137 per year = $211,391. The cost per respondent is equal to $1,854. Statutory Authority: Statutory provisions of sections 205(a) and

(e)of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824d. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6561 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-370-000] Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Notice of Tariff Filing April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 28, 2007, Colorado Interstate Gas Company

(CIG)tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, the tariff sheets listed in Appendix to the filing, to become effective May 28, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6566 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-372-000] Colorado Interstate Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Colorado Interstate Gas Company

(CIG)tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective May 1, 2007: Fourth Revised Sheet No. 13C Fourth Revised Sheet No. 13D Third Revised Sheet No. 13E CIG states that copies of its filing have been served to all firm customers, interruptible customers and affected state commissions. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6568 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-368-000] Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP; Notice of Tariff Filing April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Dominion Cove Point LNG, LP (Cove Point) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 282, to become effective May 1, 2007. Cove Point states that the purpose of this filing is to modify General Terms and Conditions Section 28 of Cove Point's tariff to provide for the purchase of LNG or natural gas for operational purposes. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6564 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-371-000] East Tennessee Natural Gas Company; Notice of Cashout Report April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, East Tennessee Natural Gas, LLC (East Tennessee) tendered for filing its annual cashout report for the November 2005 through October 2006 period in accordance with Rate Schedules LMS-MA, LMS-PA, and PAL. East Tennessee states that copies of the filing were mailed to all affected customers of East Tennessee and interested state commissions. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time April 11, 2007. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6567 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-369-000] Enbridge Offshore Pipelines

(UTOS)LLC; Notice of Tariff Filing and Transportation Service Agreement April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Enbridge Offshore Pipelines

(UTOS)LLC

(UTOS)tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 165, to become effective April 1, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6565 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP07-85-000] Equitrans, L.P.; Notice of Request Under Blanket Authorization April 3, 2007. Take notice that on February 16, 2007, Equitrans, L.P. (Equitrans), 225 North Shore Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15212, filed in Docket No. CP07-85-000, a prior notice request pursuant to sections 157.205, 157.208, and 157.216 of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's regulations under the Natural Gas Act to replace approximately 12.65 miles of Line No. H-152, located in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, all as more fully set forth in the application, which is on file with the Commission and open to public inspection. The filing may also be viewed on the Web at *http://www.ferc.gov* using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC at *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* or call toll-free,

(886)208-3676 or TTY,

(202)502-8659. Specifically, Equitrans proposes to replace approximately 12.65 noncontiguous miles of sixteen-inch diameter bare steel pipe with sixteen-inch diameter coated steel pipe, located in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. Equitrans estimates the cost of construction to be $24,594,494. Equitrans states the replacement project is necessitated by the age and condition of the existing bare steel pipeline. Any questions regarding the application should be directed to David K. Dewey, Vice President & General Counsel, Equitrans, L.P., 225 North Shore Drive, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15212 at

(412)395-2566. Any person or the Commission's Staff may, within 60 days after the issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to intervene or notice of intervention and, pursuant to § 157.205 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act

(NGA)(18 CFR 157.205) a protest to the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefore, the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the day after the time allowed for protest. If a protest is filed and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the NGA. The Commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests, and interventions via the Internet in lieu of paper. See 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ) under the “e-Filing” link. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6559 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-374-000] Hardy Storage Company, LLC; Notice of Tariff Filing and Non-Conforming Service Agreements April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007 Hardy Storage Company, LLC (Hardy) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, with a proposed effective date of April 1, 2007: First Revised Sheet No. 197. Original Sheet No. 200. Hardy also tendered for filing the following four non-conforming Service Agreements for consideration and approval:

(1)HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and Baltimore Gas & Electric Company (Dated February 2, 2006);

(2)HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and City of Charlottesville (Dated February 2, 2006);

(3)HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and Piedmont Natural Gas Company (Dated February 2, 2006); and

(4)HSS Service Agreement between Hardy Storage Company, LLC and Washington Gas Light Company (Dated February 2, 2006). Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6570 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-377-000] National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation; Notice of Tariff Filing April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, National Fuel Gas Supply Corporation (National) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fourth Revised Volume No. 1, One Hundredth Revised Sheet No. 9, to become effective March 1, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6573 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RR07-11-000] North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Filing April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 26, 2007, The North American Electric Reliability Corporation filed a request for approval of the eight Regional Reliability Standards proposed by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council for the Western Interconnection, pursuant to section 215(d)(1) of the Federal Power Act and section 39.5 of the Commission's Regulations, 18 CFR 39.5. The Commission is seeking public comment on the proposed regional differences. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of comments in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of comments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 17, 2007. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6576 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP96-272-064] Northern Natural Gas Company; Notice of Negotiated Rates April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Northern Natural Gas Company (Northern) tendered for filing to become part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets proposed to be effective on April 1, 2007: 48 Revised Sheet No. 66 40 Revised Sheet No. 66A Ninth Revised Sheet No. 66B First Revised Sheet No. 66B.01 Northern also requests to change the name of WPS Energy Services, Inc. to Integrys Energy Services, Inc. as a result of the company changing its name. Northern further states that copies of the filing have been mailed to each of its customers and interested state commissions. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6574 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-367-000] Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP; Notice of Tariff Filing April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Company, LP (Panhandle) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, the sheets listed in Appendix A attached to the filing, effective May 1, 2007. Panhandle states that this filing is made in accordance with Section 25.1 (Flow Through of CashOut Revenues in Excess of Costs) of the General Terms and Conditions in Panhandle's FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6563 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-375-000] Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas Tariff April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007 Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets, to become effective May 1, 2007: Seventh Revised Sheet No. 203. Seventh Revised Sheet No. 211. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6571 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-376-000] Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Authorization and Waiver April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation (Transco) seeks authorization from the Commission to use the posting and bid evaluation procedures in Section 43 of the General Terms & Conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff (GT&C) to sell certain excess top gas inventory. In conjunction with such sale, Transco requests that the Commission grant waiver of Section 43.5 of the GT&C in order for Transco to recognize the appropriate accounting from the sale in its gas inventory account. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time April 11, 2007. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6572 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP96-359-033] Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Negotiated Rate April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 29, 2007, Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing three executed service agreements between Transco and City of Monroe, North Carolina, Hess Corporation, and Greenville Utilities Commission and an executed amendment to service agreement between Transco and Progress Ventures, Inc. all of which pertain to negotiated rate agreements for firm transportation service under Transco's Momentum Expansion Project. The effective date of the agreements is April 1, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of § 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov,* using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov,* or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6575 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-366-000] Vector Pipeline L.P.; Notice of Annual Fuel Use Report April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Vector Pipeline L.P. (Vector) tendered for filing an annual report of its monthly fuel use ratios for the period January 1, 2006 through December 31, 2006. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the date as indicated below. Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov* . Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6562 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. RP07-373-000] Wyoming Interstate Company, Ltd; Notice of Tariff Filing April 3, 2007. Take notice that on March 30, 2007, Wyoming Interstate Company, LTD

(WIC)tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second Revised Volume No. 2, Ninth Revised Sheet No. 64 to become effective May 1, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed in accordance with the provisions of Section 154.210 of the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 154.210). Anyone filing an intervention or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. Anyone filing an intervention or protest on or before the intervention or protest date need not serve motions to intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6569 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. EL07-52-000] Louisiana Public Service Commission, Complainant, v. Entergy Corporation; Entergy Services, Inc.; Entergy Louisiana, LLC; Entergy Arkansas, Inc.; Entergy Mississippi, Inc.; Entergy New Orleans, Inc.; Entergy Gulf States, Inc., Respondents; Notice of Complaint April 3, 2007. Take notice that on April 3, 2007, Louisiana Public Service Commission tendered for filing, pursuant to Rule 206 of the Rules of Practice and Procedure of the Federal Regulatory Energy Commission (Commission) and section 206 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e, seeks revisions to the Entergy System Agreement Service Schedule MSS-3 because that Service Schedule is unjust, unreasonable, unduly discriminatory and conflicts with principles established in prior decisions of the Commission. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and protests must be served on the Complainants. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the “eFiling” link at *http://www.ferc.gov.* Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426. This filing is accessible on-line at *http://www.ferc.gov* , using the “eLibrary” link and is available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an “eSubscription” link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* , or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on April 30, 2007. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6560 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Combined Notice of Filings #1 April 3, 2007. Take notice that the Commission received the following electric rate filings: *Docket Numbers:* ER05-741-001. *Applicants:* Public Service Company of New Mexico. *Description:* Public Service Company of New Mexico submits its second Revised Sheet 40 et al to implement the Offer of Settlement approved in the Settlement Order. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0097. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER06-185-008. *Applicants:* New York Independent System Operator, Inc. *Description:* New York Independent System Operator submits a supplemental to its 12/29/06 filing pursuant to FERC's 4/7/06 Order. *Filed Date:* 3/29/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0090. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Thursday, April 19, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-274-001. *Applicants:* Juice Energy, Inc. *Description:* Juice Energy, Inc submits a notice of change in status pursuant to the requirements of Order 652. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0093. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-679-000. *Applicants:* Public Service Company of New Mexico. *Description:* Public Service Company of New Mexico submits Substitute Sheet 207 et al to FERC Electric Tariff, Original Volume 6 pursuant to section 205 of the FPA. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070402-0070. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-680-000. *Applicants:* ISO New England Inc; New England Power Pool. *Description:* ISO New England Inc et al jointly submit their Market Rule 1 and Billing Policy changes relating to Meter Data Errors. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0092. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-681-000. *Applicants:* Electric Energy, Inc. *Description:* Electric Energy, Inc submits modification 19 to a Power Contract dated 9/2/87 with the U.S. Dept of Energy designated as contract DE-AC05-760R01312 (Schedule FERC 10). *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0032. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-682-000. *Applicants:* Entergy Services, Inc. *Description:* Entergy Operating Companies submits amendments to the Entergy System Agreement to make adjustments to its compliance filing made on 12/18/06. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0089. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-683-000. *Applicants:* Entergy Services, Inc. *Description:* Entergy Services Inc, agent and on behalf of the Entergy Operating Companies submits an amendment to the Entergy System Agreement. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0091. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-684-000. *Applicants:* Entergy Services, Inc. *Description:* Entergy Services Inc, agent on behalf of the Entergy Operating Companies submits an amendment to one provision of Service Schedule MSS-3, Section 30.12, to the Entergy System Agreement. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0090. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-689-000. *Applicants:* PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. *Description:* PJM Interconnection, LLC submits an executed Interconnection Service Agreement w/Industrial Power Generating Company, LLC et al. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0215. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-690-000. *Applicants:* LG&E Energy Marketing Inc. *Description:* LG&E Energy Marketing, Inc submits limited amendments to its Tariff for Cost-Based Sales of Capacity and Energy. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0043. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. *Docket Numbers:* ER07-692-000. *Applicants:* Florida Power Corporation. *Description:* Florida Power Corporation dba Progress Energy Florida, Inc submits a cost-based Power Sales Agreement with Seminole Electric Cooperative, Inc. *Filed Date:* 3/30/2007. *Accession Number:* 20070403-0216. *Comment Date:* 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, April 20, 2007. Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern Time on the specified comment date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the same docket. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding, interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline need not be served on persons other than the Applicant. The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at *http://www.ferc.gov* . To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the intervention or protests. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426. The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov* . or call

(866)208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call

(202)502-8659. Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6584 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [Docket No. CP07-81-000] Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C.; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Petal No. 3 Compressor Station Project and Request for Comments on Environmental Issues April 3, 2007. The staff of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or Commission) will prepare an environmental assessment

(EA)that will discuss the environmental impacts of the Petal No. 3 Compressor Station Project, involving construction and operation of facilities by Petal Gas Storage, L.L.C. (Petal) in Forrest County, Mississippi. The EA will be used by the Commission in its decision-making process to determine whether or not to authorize the project. This notice announces the opening of the scoping period that will be used to gather environmental input from the public and interested agencies on the project. Your input will help the Commission staff determine which issues need to be evaluated in the EA. Please note that the scoping period will close on May 3, 2007. An effort is being made to send this notice to all individuals, organizations, Native American Tribes, and government entities interested in and/or potentially affected by the proposed project. This includes all landowners who are potential right-of-way grantors, whose property may be used temporarily for project purposes, or who own homes within distances defined in the Commission's regulations of certain aboveground facilities. We encourage government representatives to notify their constituents of this planned project and encourage them to comment on their areas of concern. A fact sheet prepared by the FERC entitled “An Interstate Natural Gas Facility on My Land? What Do I Need to Know?” was attached to the project notice provided to landowners. This fact sheet addresses a number of typically asked questions, including the use of eminent domain and how to participate in the Commission's proceedings. It is available for viewing on the FERC Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ). Summary of the Proposed Project Petal proposes to construct a new compressor station consisting of three 5,000-horsepower, electric-drive compressor units at its existing Petal Storage Facility in Forrest County, Mississippi. Petal would construct a new 60-foot by 200-foot building to house the proposed units and other appurtenant facilities. In addition, a 1,605-foot-long, 20-inch-diameter pipeline would be constructed in order to connect the proposed compressor station to Petal's existing gas storage operations. 1 1 Petal's application in Docket No. CP07-81-000 was filed with the Commission under Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act. Petal currently has an estimated working storage capacity of 18 billion cubic feet of natural gas in four storage caverns. The Petal Storage Facility is capable of delivering natural gas into five interstate pipeline systems. The proposed addition of the Petal No. 3 Compressor Station would allow Petal to utilize the full storage capacity of the Petal Storage Facility. The general location of Petal's proposed facilities is shown on the map attached as appendix 1. 2 2 The appendices referenced in this notice are not being printed in the **Federal Register** . Copies of all appendices, other than Appendix 1 (map), are available on the Commission's Web site at the “eLibrary” link or from the Commission's Public Reference Room, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, or call

(202)502-8371. For instructions on connecting to eLibrary refer to the last page of this notice. Copies of the appendices were sent to all those receiving this notice in the mail. Land Requirements for Construction Construction of the proposed Petal No. 3 Compressor Station Project would affect a total of about 21.1 acres of land. Following construction, about 12.1 acres of land would be allowed to revert to its previous conditions. Disturbance associated with aboveground facilities would comprise about 6.7 acres of permanently affected land. A new 1,485-foot-long access road would be constructed surrounding the compressor station building, permanently disturbing 0.5 acre of land. A 75-foot-wide construction right-of-way is proposed for the associated pipeline. Petal would maintain a 50-foot-wide permanent right-of-way for operation and maintenance of the proposed facilities. Permanent disturbance of the pipeline would total about 1.8 acres. All land that would be affected by the proposed compressor station, pipeline, and access road is owned by Petal. The EA Process We are preparing the EA to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act

(NEPA)which requires the Commission to take into account the environmental impacts that could result from an action whenever it considers the issuance of a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. NEPA also requires us to discover and address concerns the public may have about proposals. This process is referred to as “scoping.” The main goal of the scoping process is to focus the analysis in the EA on the important environmental issues. By this Notice of Intent, the Commission staff requests public comments on the scope of the issues to address in the EA. All comments received are considered during the preparation of the EA. Our independent analysis of the issues will be in the EA. Depending on the comments received during the scoping process, the EA may be published and mailed to Federal, State, and local agencies, public interest groups, interested individuals, affected landowners, newspapers and libraries in the project area, and the Commission's official service list for this proceeding. A comment period will be allotted for review if the EA is published. We will consider all comments on the EA before we make our recommendations to the Commission. Public Participation You can make a difference by providing us with your specific comments or concerns about the project. By becoming a commenter, your concerns will be addressed in the EA and considered by the Commission. Your comments should focus on the potential environmental effects of the proposal, reasonable alternatives to the proposal (including alternative locations and routes), and measures to avoid or lessen environmental impact. The more specific your comments, the more useful they will be. Please carefully follow these instructions to ensure that your comments are received in time and properly recorded: • Send an original and two copies of your letter to: Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Room 1A, Washington, DC 20426. • Label one copy of the comments for the attention of Gas Branch 1; • Reference Docket No. CP07-81-000; • Mail your comments so that they will be received in Washington, DC on or before May 3, 2007. Please note that the Commission encourages electronic filing of comments. See 18 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR)385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Internet Web site at *http://www.ferc.gov* under the “eFiling” link and the link to the User's Guide. Prepare your submission in the same manner as you would if filing on paper and save it to a file on your hard drive. Before you can file comments you will need to create an account by clicking on “Login to File” and then “New User Account.” You will be asked to select the type of filing you are making. This filing is considered a “Comment on Filing.” Becoming an Intervenor In addition to involvement in the EA scoping process, you may want to become an official party to the proceeding known as an “intervenor”. Intervenors play a more formal role in the process. Among other things, intervenors have the right to receive copies of case-related Commission documents and filings by other intervenors. Likewise, each intervenor must send one electronic copy (using the Commission's e-Filing system) or 14 paper copies of its filings to the Secretary of the Commission and must send a copy of its filings to all other parties on the Commission's service list for this proceeding. If you want to become an intervenor you must file a motion to intervene according to Rule 214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214). Only intervenors have the right to seek rehearing of the Commission's decision. Affected landowners and parties with environmental concerns may be granted intervenor status upon showing good cause by stating that they have a clear and direct interest in this proceeding which would not be adequately represented by any other parties. You do not need intervenor status to have your environmental comments considered. Additional Information Additional information about the project is available from the Commission's Office of External Affairs at 1-866-208 FERC

(3372)or on the FERC Internet Web site ( *http://www.ferc.gov* ). Using the “eLibrary” link, select “General Search” from the eLibrary menu, enter the selected date range and “Docket Number” (i.e., CP07-81-000), and follow the instructions. For assistance with access to eLibrary, the helpline can be reached at 1-866-208-3676, TTY

(202)502-8659, or at *FERCOnlineSupport@ ferc.gov.* The eLibrary link on the FERC Internet Web site also provides access to the texts of formal documents issued by the Commission, such as orders, notices, and rule makings. In addition, the Commission now offers a free service called eSubscription which allows you to keep track of all formal issuances and submittals in specific dockets. This can reduce the amount of time you spend researching proceedings by automatically providing you with notification of these filings, document summaries and direct links to the documents. Go to *http://www.ferc.gov/esubscribenow.htm.* Philis J. Posey, Acting Secretary. [FR Doc. E7-6558 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6717-01-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [GA-78-200703; FRL-8296-1] Adequacy Status of the Atlanta Early Progress 8-Hour Ozone Motor Vehicle Emission Budgets for Transportation Conformity Purposes AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of adequacy. SUMMARY: In this notice, EPA is notifying the public that we have found that the Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets (MVEBs) in the Atlanta Early Progress State Implementation Plan (SIP), submitted on January 16, 2007, by the Georgia Environmental Protection Division (GA EPD) of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources, are adequate for transportation conformity purposes. As a result of EPA's finding, the Atlanta area must use the MVEBs from the January 16, 2007, Atlanta Early Progress SIP for future conformity determinations for the 8-hour ozone standard. DATES: These MVEBs are effective April 24, 2007. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lynorae Benjamin, Environmental Engineer, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4, Air Planning Branch, Air Quality Modeling and Transportation Section, 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Ms. Benjamin can also be reached by telephone at

(404)562-9040, or via electronic mail at *benjamin.lynorae@epa.gov.* The finding is available at EPA's conformity Web site: *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/currsips.htm.* SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Today's notice is simply an announcement of a finding that EPA has already made. EPA Region 4 sent a letter to GA EPD on January 24, 2007, stating that the MVEBs in the Atlanta Early Progress SIP, submitted on January 16, 2007, are adequate. The Atlanta 8-hour ozone nonattainment area is comprised of the following twenty counties: Barrow, Bartow, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding and Walton. EPA's adequacy comment period ran from October 30, 2006, through November 29, 2006. During EPA's adequacy comment period no adverse comments were received. This finding has also been announced on EPA's conformity Web site: *http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/transconf/pastsips.htm.* The adequate MVEBs are provided in the following table: Atlanta 8-Hour Ozone MVEBs [Tons per day] 2006 VOC 306.75 NO X 172.27 Transportation conformity is required by section 176(c) of the Clean Air Act, as amended in 1990. EPA's conformity rule requires that transportation plans, programs and projects conform to state air quality implementation plans and establishes the criteria and procedures for determining whether or not they do. Conformity to a SIP means that transportation activities will not produce new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the national ambient air quality standards. The criteria by which EPA determines whether a SIP's MVEBs are adequate for transportation conformity purposes are outlined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations 93.118(e)(4). We have described the process for determining the adequacy of submitted SIP budgets in our July 1, 2004, final rulemaking entitled, “ Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments for the New 8-hour Ozone and PM 2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards and Miscellaneous Revisions for Existing Areas; Transportation Conformity Rule Amendments: Response to Court Decision and Additional Rule Changes” (69 FR 40004). Please note that an adequacy review is separate from EPA's completeness review, and it also should not be used to prejudge EPA's ultimate approval of the SIP. Even if EPA finds the MVEBs adequate, the Agency may later determine that the SIP itself is not approvable. On December 22, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision on EPA's Phase I rule implementing the 1997 8-hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) (D.C. Cir. No. 04-1200). EPA is currently analyzing the decision in detail. EPA's adequacy finding on the MVEBs in the Early Progress SIP for the Atlanta 8-hour nonattainment area is not affected by the court's decision and does not address any other requirements that may be affected by the decision. EPA's adequacy finding determines only that the budgets are adequate for the specific purpose submitted, and provides no conclusions on what requirements may ultimately apply in the area as a result of the court decision. Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 *et seq.* Dated: March 29, 2007. J.I. Palmer, Jr., Regional Administrator, Region 4. [FR Doc. E7-6620 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [Docket# EPA-RO4-SFUND-2007-0263; FRL-8296-5] Anaconda/Milgo; Miami, Dade County, Florida; Notice of Settlement AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). ACTION: Notice of settlement. SUMMARY: Under Section 122(h) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), the United States Environmental Protection Agency has entered into a settlement for reimbursement of past response concerning the Anaconda/Milgo Superfund Site located in Miami, Dade County, Florida. DATES: The Agency will consider public comments on the settlement until May 9, 2007. The Agency will consider all comments received and may modify or withdraw its consent to the settlement if comments received disclose facts or considerations which indicate that the settlement is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. ADDRESSES: Copies of the settlement are available from Ms. Paula V. Batchelor. Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-RO4-SFUND-2007-0263 or Site name Anaconda/Milgo Superfund Site by one of the following methods: • *www.regulations.gov:* Follow the on-line instructions for submitting comments. • E-mail: *Batchelor.Paula@epa.gov.* • Fax: 404/562-8842/Attn Paula V. Batchelor. Mail: Ms. Paula V. Batchelor, U.S. EPA Region 4, WMD-SEIMB, 61 Forsyth Street, S.W., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. “In addition, please mail a copy of your comments on the information collection provisions to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Attn: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th St. NW., Washington, DC 20503.” *Instructions:* Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-R04-SFUND-2007-0263. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in the public docket without change and may be made available online at *www.regulations.gov* , including any personal information provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be Confidential Business Information

(CBI)or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through *www.regulations.gov* or e-mail. The *www.regulations.gov* Web site is an “anonymous access” system, which means EPA will not know your identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of your comment. If you send an e-mail comment directly to EPA without going through *www.regulations.gov* your e-mail address will be automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name and other contact information in the body of your comment and with any disk or CD-ROM you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket visit the EPA Docket Center homepage at *http://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.* *Docket:* All documents in the docket are listed in the *www.regulations.gov* index. Although listed in the index, some information is not publicly available, e.g., CBI or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain other material, such as copyrighted material, will be publicly available only in hard copy. Publicly available docket materials are available either electronically in *www.regulations.gov* or in hard copy at the U.S. EPA Region 4 office located at 61 Forsyth Street, SW., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. Regional office is open from 7 a.m. until 6:30 pm. Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. Written comments may be submitted to Ms. Batchelor within 30 calendar days of the date of this publication. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paula V. Batchelor at 404/562-8887. Dated: March 26, 2007. Rosalind H. Brown, Chief, Superfund Enforcement & Information Management Branch, Superfund Division. [FR Doc. E7-6612 Filed 4-6-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6560-50-P FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION Sunshine Act Notices Agency: Federal Election Comission. Date & Time: Thursday, April 12, 2007, at 10 a.m. Place: 999 E Street, NW., Washington, DC (ninth floor). Status: This meeting will be open to the public. Items to be Discussed: Correction and Approval of Minutes. Legislative Recommendations 2007. Management and Administrative Matters. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Biersack, Press Officer, Telephone:

(202)694-1220. Mary W. Dove, Secretary of the Commission. [FR Doc. 07-1773 Filed 4-5-05; 2:28 pm]

Connectionstraces to 19

Traces to 19 documents

U.S. Code